User talk:Deavenger

This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 10, which includes these articles:

• News and notes: Commons, conferences, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Politics, more politics, and more
• Dispatches: 100 Featured sounds milestone
• Wikiproject report: WikiProject Christianity
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 23:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may edit it now.Here are few link whiich might be useful,India's External Intelligence Agencyl,Full of holes,Recruited by RAW, trained by Army: LTTE,Has to Take a Look in the Mirror to Understand the Mumbai Attacks.User:Yousaf465 (talk)

Wikipedia Signpost — 16 March 2009

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:28, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 20:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With well over half of its population living in the slums, what reason could you possibly give to omit my pictures, which I believe are fair representation of the city? Remember, this article is not about the financial importance of the various cities, it is about their populations. If you want to gloss over the slum population of Mumbai, then why insist on listing Mumbai as #1 on the list? If you subtract the slum population, Mumbai's population would be reduced by at least 50%, and it would drop out of the top spot. I don't understand your tendency of glossing over the slums of Mumbai. I for one appreciate them because people who dwell them contribute significantly to Mumbai's economy. $7.00 Billion dollars are generated in the slums annually, and people who live there earn honest living and contribute to Mumbai's diversity and charm. Just because these people don't have a better place to live does not make them unsightly. There is a lot to be admired about their perseverance, entrepreneurship, and hard work. I think they really represent what India is all about: despite the utmost of hardship, people succeed and never fail to strive for a better tomorrow. By78 (talk) 01:48, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) --Novis-M (talk) 03:49, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deavenger, I noticed you using the phrase "non-OR sources" a couple of times on WT:INB, and stopped by to find out what exactly you are referring to ? Note that, WP:OR refers to "unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas", and by that definition published sources never violate OR. To state it another way: it is perfectly fine to use reliable sources that report "original research" (such as scholarly papers and books, newspaper reports etc); onle we (wikipedia editors) are disallowed from original research or synthesis on wikipedia. Hope that explanation makes sense! Let me know if I am missing something in your statement, or if you would like further clarifications. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 17:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Most of the articles I work on are highly sensitive articles where people bring lots or sources that they usually synthesis. For instance, someone brought an article from The Economist, a reliable source overall. The article said a specific country could be considered an economic superpower, and used that source to say that country was a potential superpower. Though an economic superpower and an emerging/potential superpower are two completely different things. As a country doesn't need to be a economic superpower to be considered a potenial superpower, and vice versa. Also, I just use non-Or as SYN technically falls under WP:OR. Deavenger (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC) copied from my talk-page to keep discussion consolidated. Abecedare (talk) 17:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disagree with your conclusion, only the particular wikipedia policy you cite to reach it. In the example you give, the Economist saying that "X is considered an economic superpower" does not violate WP:OR or WP:SYNT. However if a user uses that statement to claims that "X is a potential superpower", that violates several policies; chiefly the statement misquotes the source, i.e. the source does not verify the statement being made.

If the statement in the article is changed to, "X is considered an economic superpower;^{Economist article} and since economic superpowers are potential superpowers, ^{some other source} X is a superpower", that would be an example of synthesis (since it uses two different sources to draw an unpublished conclusion that advances a POV) and disallowed on wikipedia.

Essentially WP:OR, WP:SYNT (just like WP:NPOV) apply to content on wikipedia, and not to sources.

PS: I have your talkpage on my watchlist now; so you can add any reply here itself. Abecedare (talk) 17:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thanks for explaining it to me. Deavenger (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I've moved your vandalism report from the Administrator intervention against vandalism page to the Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents page here because your report seemed to contain complex vandalism requiring a range block. Thank you for your report! Malinaccier (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:07, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the map you requested - do you have any other comments or suggestions? I hope it meets your expectations — in the mean time I've marked it as resolved. ChrisDHDR 09:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have started a topic at the Admin notice board about the IP user that keeps on removing content from the Great power and Middle power articles. I was wondering if I could get you to comment about the situation so that we can get this situation resolved. Thanks. -- Phoenix (talk) 06:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! I was just wondering how the subsections for the potential superpower page is going. 81.229.73.179 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, (are you Swedish Pirate) I finished the the India subsections a while ago, and have made changes to get rid of OR and SYN sources, and adding new ones. However, the other ones, I haven't really worked on them for a while. I could finish China easily as I have started on it, however, I can't do EU or Russia, as I have only one source I was able to research for EU, and none for Russia, not too mention, Russia has to few sources. Plus, real life is getting pretty hectic for me, so I might be able to finish China, but I'm hoping someone can do EU and Russia, get reliable sources that aren't OR or SYN, and put them up hereDeavenger (talk) 23:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm Swedish Pirate (I was on another computer and forgot to log in). It's great that you're still working on them, but I understand that real life issues are the number one priority. What's the source you do have for the EU? Swedish pirate (talk) 10:06, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I see you've tagged J-manza's smashing flash games plus for deletion based on a closed AfD. Which discussion is it? I can't find one that relates to this article. —C.Fred (talk) 04:27, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that explains it: it went one further down the list and put {{db-afd}} on the article. Personally, I'd have called it db-web; that's the rationale I used when I deleted it. —C.Fred (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was pretty well in the realm of advertising also. However, merely rewriting it wasn't going to cut it; they were going to have to assert notability. —C.Fred (talk) 04:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it might be a good idea to run a contest or two through the Countries WikiProject to attract editors to improve country coverage on Wikipedia, especially the country outlines.

I noticed you are a member of the WikiProject, and was wondering if you could help.

I've posted a message at Countries WikiProject talk page to get discussion started on what the awards programs should be and how they should be run.

Your ideas and feedback would be greatly appreciated.

The Transhumanist 23:47, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 12:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You maybe interested in the fact that a user opened a sockpuppet case against the anon 151.... IP's who edited EU talkpage. Based on your comments and a review of his talk pages edits I added WORLDPOWER27 to the list of suspected socks. You can have a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EU 100%. Arnoutf (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I get your point, however in my opinion the later edit made by me was relevant to the concerned issue being discussed — "millions mired in poverty and ineffective government prevents China or India from rivaling the EU or the US". Just because the article does not specifically talk about India's overall "superpower" potential, it doesn't mean that it is not relevant to the topic. The concerned article takes a more general approach and clearly says that India's stable democracy increases its economic potential and government efficiency. Therefore, I find your argument against the article unconvincing.

Also, the section on Russia clearly discusses its stature as an "energy superpower" and the sources mentioned supporting that argument are either outdated (pre-economic crisis) or do not explicitly link Russia's "energy superpower" status to its overall superpower potential.

To conclude, commonsense says that a superpower needs to be an "economic superpower" but not necessarily an "energy superpower". Discussing the economic potential of these countries is very much relevant to the concerned topic. --Nosedown (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I rest my case. And thanks for making these edits. Cheers --Nosedown (talk) 02:40, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:26, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference if you see any pattern of one edit, revert by other editor, second edit, revert by you, then your next course of action should always be a {{3rr}} template. Then if the third edit is three seconds after your warning you can start a 3rr report, but a 3rr report requires a warning. The upside being that if they do a fourth edit then they will be blocked, and the tone of your edit summaries or anything you say on a talk page does not matter, four edits (with a warning) is an automatic block. Of course it is especially helpful of another editor does the first revert because then you cannot hit 3rr yourself. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

while learning Farsi whenever you need help you can count on me :-) --Mardetanha ^talk 22:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:16, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've recently taken a bit of an interest in the entire topic of Great Powers etc, etc, etc. I noticed that you had a Potential/Emerging Great Powers subpage going there that hasn't been edited in a while. Just wondering what the reason for that lack of activity was, and if there's any way that I can help (though seeing as it appears to be your pet project, you can decline that offer). I just think that if we have a Potential Superpowers article then we should have a Potential/Emerging Great Power article too. Comics (talk) 13:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Just asking. I've seen one site - Great Power Politics - that has a list of great powers - maybe that could be a starting point for listing current/possible emerging ones? It says that Turkey /is/ a current one, but I at least doubt that. Anyway, just tell me when work begins on it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comic master (talk • contribs) 22:48, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that too. Anyways, just leave a note on my talk page when work starts up on that article Comics (talk) 06:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey nice to see you're still active with the project. I'll definitely continue to help with reverting vandalism and POV pushing. I'll also see how much I can contribute to the overhaul of the other articles but I may not have that much time on my hand to write articles these days. Hope you're well. Nirvana888 (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:18, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I was GA reviewer for the above article. I believe you and Phoenix79 were the main editors on this page. Phoenix has gone AWOL for a while and the article has been on hold at GA review for quite a few weeks now. I'd like to either pass or fail it and clear it from the list. Do you want to look at it and discuss further edits, or shall I fail it for now. I'm happy to help out if either of you wants to revisit it at a future point. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - let's get it to GA status. I would say major power is similar to great power; however it really depends on how the author defines it. Some authors may see major power as more of a regional power and others as great powers with truly global influence. For example, see this academic paper: [[1]]. The author sometimes uses major power and great power interchangeably. Generally, I would be reluctant to say major power is the same as great power. Hope this helps. Nirvana888 (talk) 18:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by -- Tinu Cherian BOT - 08:45, 28 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. We are being chased about closing the GAN for Great power. Can you look at this ASAP? Thanks. hamiltonstone (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mean to be a WP:DICK or anything, but ideally, GA reviews should not take longer than 3-4 weeks, so those that take 2-3 months are pushing the limits. If there had been more evidence of ongoing discussion on the actual review page, it wouldn't be as big of a deal, since we can see the evidence of active discussion and review. But the most recent signed comment there is from July 11, which is over a month ago.

Please try to finish up as soon as you can! Thanks! Dr. Cash (talk) 00:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'm sorry to hear you are unlikely to continue as an editor. I will go ahead and fail the GAN, but I hope you will have an opportunity to play a role again one day. Things don't sound too good, so best wishes to you. hamiltonstone (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:49, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 16:07, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey how are ya pal? Haven't heard from you for along time after your retirement. I've been trying to keep the articles up to standard while you've been gone. Let me know if you ever come back the Project misses your presence. Nirvana888 (talk) 18:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. Sorry to bother you, but you are (titularly at least) a member of WP:WikiProject Economics, as defined by this category. If you don't know me, I'm a Wikipedia administrator, but an unqualified economist. I enjoy writing about economics, but I'm not very good at it, which is why I would like to support in any way I can the strong body of economists here on Wikipedia. I'm only bothering you because you are probably one of them. Together, I'd like us to establish the future direction of WikiProject Economics, but first, we need to know who we've got to help.

Whatever your area of expertise or level of qualification, if you're interested in helping with the WikiProject (even if only as part of a larger commitment to this wonderful online encyclopedia of ours), would you mind adding your signature to this page? It only takes a second. Thank you.

Message delivered on behalf of User:Jarry1250 by LivingBot.

Hey there Deavenger, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Deavenger/Potential Superpower former subsections. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 00:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]